Thank you, Susie Madrak, for posting the following story and sharing the findings of Mark Z. Barabak and Faye Fiore of the Los Angeles Times newspaper in an article entitled "Congress' own healthcare benefits: membership has its privileges" written on August 2, 2009.
http://crooksandliars.com/...
http://articles.latimes.com/...
Like Susie, I continue to be insulted and outraged with the deniers and naysayers of healthcare reform who actually feel that they are so much better than I am that it's perfectly normal and okay for members of Congress to have the creme de la creme of healthcare, while the American public is supposed to settle for less or nothing. Their obvious thinking of although I "work" for the American, I am better than they are so I am entitled to the "privilege" of healthcare is yet another American tragedy.
Whether they want to accept it or not, middle class and poor Republicans are being treated as unjustly and insultingly as those of the same stature who are Democrats. The difference is that the cult-type thinking of the middle class and poor Republicans don't care what they have to sacrifice, as long their leader is a Republican.
As reported, in part, by the Los Angeles Times and Crooks and Liars:
" . . . Among the advantages: a choice of 10 healthcare plans that provide access to a national network of doctors, as well as several HMOs that serve each member's home state. By contrast, 85% of private companies offering health coverage provide their employees one type of plan. Take it or leave it.
Lawmakers also get special treatment at Washington's federal medical facilities and, for a few hundred dollars a month, access to their own pharmacy and doctors, nurses and medical technicians standing by in an office conveniently located between the House and Senate chambers.
In all, taxpayers spent about $15 billion last year to insure 8.5 million federal workers and their dependents, including postal service employees, according to the Office of Personnel Management.
There are generous plans available in private industry. But the federal coverage far surpasses that enjoyed by 70 million Americans who are underinsured and financially at risk in the event of a major health crisis -- not to mention the estimated 46 million who have no medical insurance.
Indeed, a question often surfaces: Why can't everyone enjoy the same benefits as members of Congress? The answer: The country probably couldn't afford it -- not without reforms to bring costs way, way down
Given their choices, lawmakers can tailor coverage in a way most Americans cannot. If a child has asthma, for instance, a federal employee might opt for coverage that costs a little more but has a bigger doctor network and lower office-visit fees.
The plan most favored by federal workers is Blue Cross Blue Shield, which covers a family for about $1,030 a month. Taxpayers kick in $700 and employees pay the rest. Seeing a doctor costs $20. Generic prescriptions cost $10. Immunizations are free. There is no coverage limit.
There is nothing more that I could say that would add to what has already been articulated by these two writers, except to again say that we are all Americans, and if quality healthcare is good enough for Congress and other federal employees to have, it is good enough for all Americans to have.